Development of a Bohmian Dialogue Community Model for Thai Educational Contexts

Abstract

This research aimed to: 1) develop guidelines and a facilitation manual for establishing a Bohmian dialogue community in Thai educational contexts; 2) implement and examine the guidelines in terms of feasibility, appropriateness, quality of participation, and 
participant learning; and 3) synthesize a Bohmian dialogue community model appropriate for Thai educational contexts. The study employed action research through two 
Plan-Act-Observe-Reflect (PAOR) cycles. Data were initially collected through a review and synthesis of relevant literature and in-depth interviews with four experts to develop preliminary guidelines and a manual. The guidelines were subsequently implemented in six dialogue sessions involving 30–35 voluntary participants. Research instruments included semi-structured interviews, observation forms, event records, after-action reflection forms, and evaluation forms. Qualitative data were analyzed using inductive content analysis, while quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
The findings revealed that:
1. The developed guidelines and manual covered space preparation, facilitator preparation, a four-stage dialogue process comprising check-in, deep listening, Bohmian dialogue, and check-out, as well as evaluation and organizational scaling. Experts rated the appropriateness of the guidelines and manual at the highest level, with mean scores of 4.60 and 4.55, respectively.
2. The implementation reflected learning at three levels: individual learning involving self-awareness and listening practices, relational learning involving trust and collegiality, and systemic awareness involving hierarchical power relations and the Thai cultural concept of Kreng Jai.
3. The synthesized model comprised four dimensions: safe space and structure, leadership and facilitation, the dialogue process, and the learning and evaluation system. Its implementation involved three phases: piloting, developing a core community, and organizational scaling and institutionalization. De-powering leadership emerged as an important enabling condition consistently identified across both action research cycles.